Sox get Sale

[cp176]

There are two conflicting theories as to how to win the World Series.

 

Theory #1 is to assemble as many blue-chip players as a team can. This team will go into the WS favored to win it... and often will.

 

Theory #2 is to get there and after that "anything can happen". After all, it's been proven time and time again that the team with the best players doesn't always win the WS.

 

It appears that DD is currently favoring Theory #!. He's assembled players at... seven... positions who would have a legitimate shot at winning some kind of personal award- MVP, GG SS, CY. That's pretty impressive! While it doesn't guarantee a WS win it would seem that this would be a good team to bet on to win it all. And that's where we are now.

 

Looking to the future there's a lot to be said for our chances if you like Theory #2. We've got players signed to longer term contracts, some of whom will probably be extended into what some of us think are the 'lean years', 4-7 years down the road. The bad news is that some of them won't be extended, too. But that core of players who will be extended combined with players like Devers and Groome could very well be a team that makes the post-season, and after that... well... anything can happen!

 

I believe the Sox will do well for the next 3-4 seasons, and after that while they may not be a powerhouse they'll be a team who'll make the playoffs...and we all know what that means.

 

I feel the same.

[cp176]

It's like I wrote this myself.

 

I'm sorry Moon but why is it if you are all in on Emp9's post, he sounds so much more optimistic about the future of the franchise then you do? I realize that you will now tell me how much you liked all of DD's moves except the Pomeranz deal but as you do, you will also be warning us all that our future is in dire jeopardy due to the fact that DD has decimated the farm and that we have done a poor job drafting and that international signings are going to be so much more difficult. For the record, I still don't mind the Pomeranz trade and I believe that the future of the red sox will be just fine due partly to fact that we have people in charge who know what they are doing. If Henry, Werner, and DD get traded, we might be in trouble though.

[moonslav59]

I'm sorry Moon but why is it if you are all in on Emp9's post, he sounds so much more optimistic about the future of the franchise then you do? I realize that you will now tell me how much you liked all of DD's moves except the Pomeranz deal but as you do, you will also be warning us all that our future is in dire jeopardy due to the fact that DD has decimated the farm and that we have done a poor job drafting and that international signings are going to be so much more difficult. For the record, I still don't mind the Pomeranz trade and I believe that the future of the red sox will be just fine due partly to fact that we have people in charge who know what they are doing. If Henry, Werner, and DD get traded, we might be in trouble though.

 

I still dislike the Kimbrel deal too, but with closer prices going through the roof, part of my position (giving prospects and paying near FA money) has been lessened in strength. He's making significantly less ($10.5M on the luxury tax budget) than a top FA closer would make today.

 

I don't think DD would have made the Pom deal had he known he was going to get Sale. I don't blame him for that, but I still really dislike the deal.

 

I do not think DD had to do all of these moves to make us the AL favorite. Maybe a better balance of the "now" and the "then" would have made me happier, but I'm very happy now.

 

I'm willing to go through some tough years later on in hopes of winning a ring or two in the next 4 years.

 

I do think times will be tough.

 

You have great faith in Sox management, and so do I, but the times have changed. It's not the same system anymore. That doesn't mean we can't change with the times and figure out a way to acquire good young talent or just decide to become the Dodgers East and spend heavily in taxes and lost revenue sharing to stay competitive.

 

My point is that, if we continue to draft like we have from the 20th slot down, or if you look how DD has drafted from the 20th slot down, it is not encouraging, in fact it is frightening. Sorry for not being optimistic, but what have we done to improve our scouting of lower level draft picks? I don't see DD as being better than Theo or Ben in this area, so where is the optimism coming from? If this is what we get with our non comp draft picks over the next 3-5 years, I'm not feeling any optimism at all:

 

(Non comp picks)

16-35:

26 Chavis. 33 Kopech 14

24 Marrero, 31 Johnson 12

28 R Fuentes 09

30 C Kelly 08

27 J Place 06

 

Comp Picks:

16-35:

19 Barnes, Swihart 11

20 Vitek 10

28 D Bard 06

 

Even if you include the comp picks, it's not pretty. Maybe we'll find another Betts in the later rounds, but even he was a one in nine drafts gem (Rizzo was taken in 2007 and was the last major draft find before Betts).

 

Again, my only optimism is with the international signings or maybe Henry deciding to pay mega taxes starting in 2-4 years. That's one reason I think Henry wants us to reset the tax this season (or next), so if he does have to go way over 3-4 years from now, the tax won't be at 50%. The international signing system has changed too. I'm not sure of the specifics, but from what I've read the new system in place makes it more difficult for high spending and big market areas to sign top prospects. If that's true, that could have a major effect on our best pipeline to great prospects.... Moncada, Bogey, Margot, Espi, Devers....

 

I've never said we are going to suck from 4-7 years from now. I think we can find a way to be pretty competitive in year 4, but I see no reason to think we'll be highly competitive in years 4-7 and maybe beyond.

 

It's easy to say any team spending $200M on salaries should always be highly competitive, but that has been proven wrong time and again. We need only to look at our history from 2012 to 2015. Not enough meaningful input from youth. Poor FA choices, which is the norm for most high-priced signings. We nailed it good in 2013, but I don't think anyone wants us to construct rosters like 2012-2015 again. The main reason we did so well last year was that we did not trade Betts, JBJ, Bogey and others for the "here and now". Many we screaming to trade some for Hamels, because they felt we were just a Hamels away from being a top contender. Sound familiar with Sale?

 

I'm highly optimistic about years 1-3. I'm not about 4-7. I really don't see any compelling argument that convinces me the odds are we will remain HIGHLY competitive after all these stars contracts expire (some of them at very low salaries comp[aritively).

[southpaw777]

I still dislike the Kimbrel deal too, but with closer prices going through the roof, part of my position (giving prospects and paying near FA money) has been lessened in strength. He's making significantly less ($10.5M on the luxury tax budget) than a top FA closer would make today.

 

I don't think DD would have made the Pom deal had he known he was going to get Sale. I don't blame him for that, but I still really dislike the deal.

 

I do not think DD had to do all of these moves to make us the AL favorite. Maybe a better balance of the "now" and the "then" would have made me happier, but I'm very happy now.

 

I'm willing to go through some tough years later on in hopes of winning a ring or two in the next 4 years.

 

I do think times will be tough.

 

You have great faith in Sox management, and so do I, but the times have changed. It's not the same system anymore. That doesn't mean we can't change with the times and figure out a way to acquire good young talent or just decide to become the Dodgers East and spend heavily in taxes and lost revenue sharing to stay competitive.

 

My point is that, if we continue to draft like we have from the 20th slot down, or if you look how DD has drafted from the 20th slot down, it is not encouraging, in fact it is frightening. Sorry for not being optimistic, but what have we done to improve our scouting of lower level draft picks? I don't see DD as being better than Theo or Ben in this area, so where is the optimism coming from? If this is what we get with our non comp draft picks over the next 3-5 years, I'm not feeling any optimism at all:

 

(Non comp picks)

16-35:

26 Chavis. 33 Kopech 14

24 Marrero, 31 Johnson 12

28 R Fuentes 09

30 C Kelly 08

27 J Place 06

 

Comp Picks:

16-35:

19 Barnes, Swihart 11

20 Vitek 10

28 D Bard 06

 

Even if you include the comp picks, it's not pretty. Maybe we'll find another Betts in the later rounds, but even he was a one in nine drafts gem (Rizzo was taken in 2007 and was the last major draft find before Betts).

 

Again, my only optimism is with the international signings or maybe Henry deciding to pay mega taxes starting in 2-4 years. That's one reason I think Henry wants us to reset the tax this season (or next), so if he does have to go way over 3-4 years from now, the tax won't be at 50%. The international signing system has changed too. I'm not sure of the specifics, but from what I've read the new system in place makes it more difficult for high spending and big market areas to sign top prospects. If that's true, that could have a major effect on our best pipeline to great prospects.... Moncada, Bogey, Margot, Espi, Devers....

 

I've never said we are going to suck from 4-7 years from now. I think we can find a way to be pretty competitive in year 4, but I see no reason to think we'll be highly competitive in years 4-7 and maybe beyond.

 

It's easy to say any team spending $200M on salaries should always be highly competitive, but that has been proven wrong time and again. We need only to look at our history from 2012 to 2015. Not enough meaningful input from youth. Poor FA choices, which is the norm for most high-priced signings. We nailed it good in 2013, but I don't think anyone wants us to construct rosters like 2012-2015 again. The main reason we did so well last year was that we did not trade Betts, JBJ, Bogey and others for the "here and now". Many we screaming to trade some for Hamels, because they felt we were just a Hamels away from being a top contender. Sound familiar with Sale?

 

I'm highly optimistic about years 1-3. I'm not about 4-7. I really don't see any compelling argument that convinces me the odds are we will remain HIGHLY competitive after all these stars contracts expire (some of them at very low salaries comp[aritively).

 

Just by DD keeping a core in tact and refusing to add cerain player to trades shows me that hes concerned about the here and now as well as the future...that and hes already taked about restocking thensystem over the next few years...you cant play for 5 years down the road in MLB...way too much can change...3-4 year windows seems to be the best way.

We have a perfect balance right now of young controlled players, established and productive vets and a pitching staff from top to bottom that I would put up against any team in MLB. And with 100m coming off payroll after 2019 and a LT north of 200m, I really dont think years 4-7 will be bad at all...

[S5Dewey]

In response to Moon's post, which I'm not going to litter up the board with by "replying" to it...

 

I know I need to familiarize myself with the new CBA, but weren't we talking a week or so ago about changes in the CBA that could minimize the high $ long term contracts that players are now getting? And if there are changes like that in the offing, aren't those changes going to work in our benefit 4-7 years down the road?

[moonslav59]

In response to Moon's post, which I'm not going to litter up the board with by "replying" to it...

 

I know I need to familiarize myself with the new CBA, but weren't we talking a week or so ago about changes in the CBA that could minimize the high $ long term contracts that players are now getting? And if there are changes like that in the offing, aren't those changes going to work in our benefit 4-7 years down the road?

 

Draft pool money goes way down for lower pick teams.

 

It's also my understanding that international pool money goes down the higher spender you are and the larger market you are.

[moonslav59]

Just by DD keeping a core in tact and refusing to add certain player to trades shows me that hes concerned about the here and now as well as the future.

 

Keeping the Core will help the here and now a lot, but it's going to be hard to see how they will help us years 4-7, unless we trade them the summer before their free agency or get comp picks when the bolt. If we keep all or most of them, it's going to cost our budget a pretty penny and keep us from filling other slots NOT BEING FILLED by up and coming top prospects, because we traded them away.

[moonslav59]

We have a perfect balance right now of young controlled players, established and productive vets and a pitching staff from top to bottom that I would put up against any team in MLB. And with 100m coming off payroll after 2019 and a LT north of 200m, I really dont think years 4-7 will be bad at all...

 

Little balance in terms of far away prospects. We went from Espi, Kopech, Basabe, Groome and others to just Groome.

 

Less balance with near ready ML prospects with just Devers and Travis looking like ML players ready in the next year or two.

 

Certainly a much better balanced ML roster for the here and now. Yes.

[Emp9]

Oh, there's no doubt we traded a lot of our long term future away for the now and the more immediate future and it's significant.

 

I'm hopeful on the prospects that are left like Swihart, Devers, Groome, Travis. I haven't even gotten too down on Owens because of his age and his frame.

 

Also, some decisions are hard to project and I have always been doubtful we extend/re-sign all three of Betts, XB, and JBJ. This past year of trades doesn't change that. There were always going to be those looming decisions in our future. Performance and timing are everything. For example, Let's say all 3 of Sandoval, XB, and Devers come close to their ceilings at the right times (before the beginning of '19). We may be able to trade Sandoval as more of a salary dump, trade XB (w/ a year of arb left before FA) for some higher tier prospects that aren't too far away (I'm thinking 2 years away), plug in Devers at 3B and sign a more defense oriented SS on a modest contract. Before Moncada, Devers was projected to have the most power offense-wise out of all our prospects the past few years. I know, best case scenario if they wind-up not keeping XB (Him and JBJ are Boris clients, so I'm skeptical on them both long term), but, I mean, something like this could happen. It not out of the realm of possibility. The Qualifying Offer rules have changed and for good reason, so we might have to re-think the way we look at our players nearing free agency. And yes, I say 2019, shouldn't we be one of the teams in contention since we're supposed to be going for it all? Why dump XB then? Well, we traded Nomar and got two pieces back (OC& DM, Not Prospects). Maybe we get a nice prospect and capable major leaguer to fill in a gap? Maybe one of our starting 2019 players gets hurt and it makes even more sense to make a trade like that? Who knows. I feel like I'm rambling now. But yeah, there should be some ways to build back the farm a little as we go along. I do agree we'll probably not see a farm system like that for a very very long time. How much that affects the major league roster is yet to be known.

[Hugh2]

In response to Moon's post, which I'm not going to litter up the board with by "replying" to it...

 

I know I need to familiarize myself with the new CBA, but weren't we talking a week or so ago about changes in the CBA that could minimize the high $ long term contracts that players are now getting? And if there are changes like that in the offing, aren't those changes going to work in our benefit 4-7 years down the road?

 

I think the new CBA is extremely small market team friendly. High market teams like NY, Boston, and LA got a s*** deal.

[oldtimer]

Just by DD keeping a core in tact and refusing to add cerain player to trades shows me that hes concerned about the here and now as well as the future...that and hes already taked about restocking thensystem over the next few years...you cant play for 5 years down the road in MLB...way too much can change...3-4 year windows seems to be the best way.

We have a perfect balance right now of young controlled players, established and productive vets and a pitching staff from top to bottom that I would put up against any team in MLB. And with 100m coming off payroll after 2019 and a LT north of 200m, I really dont think years 4-7 will be bad at all...

 

The core include Sam Travis who appears to be a possible to make the team some time in 2017, Devers who is a longer shot for 2017 and Groome, who is a ways off. No as deep as we might be, but some nice talent to add to the mix.

[Hugh2]

The core include Sam Travis who appears to be a possible to make the team some time in 2017, Devers who is a longer shot for 2017 and Groome, who is a ways off. No as deep as we might be, but some nice talent to add to the mix.

 

The top 2 of our system would still stack up with any systems top two with Devers and Groome, but there is a HUGE drop off after that.

 

I also think Devers is the type of prospect who spends all year in Portland. I think he may be in line for a cup of coffee mid 2018, and fighting for a starting position in 2019

[moonslav59]

The core include Sam Travis who appears to be a possible to make the team some time in 2017, Devers who is a longer shot for 2017 and Groome, who is a ways off. No as deep as we might be, but some nice talent to add to the mix.

 

Part of why I am saying it's not logical to think we can just keep rebuilding as we did under Theo and Ben. Even those two would have a harder time going forward.

[harmony]

The top 2 of our system would still stack up with any systems top two with Devers and Groome, but there is a HUGE drop off after that.

 

I also think Devers is the type of prospect who spends all year in Portland. I think he may be in line for a cup of coffee mid 2018, and fighting for a starting position in 2019

For what it's worth, MLB Prospect Watch ranks Rafael Devers and Jason Groome at No. 16 and No. 31 (with Andrew Benintendi at No. 5) while the White Sox* have Yoan Moncada and Lucas Giolito at No. 1 and No. 3, the Braves have Dansby Swanson and Ozzie Albies at No. 4 and No. 12, and the Pirates have Tyler Glasnow and Austin Meadows at No. 8 and No. 9. Even the Yankees have Clint Frazier at No. 15, Gleyber Torres at No. 17 and Jorge Mateo at No. 18:

 

http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=prospects

 

* the White Sox also have Michael Kopech at No. 30, Reynaldo Lopez at No. 38, Carson Fulmer at No. 58 and Zack Collins at No. 80

Edited December 15, 2016 by harmony

[Hugh2]

For what it's worth, MLB Prospect Watch ranks Rafael Devers and Jason Groome at No. 15 and No. 31 (with Andrew Benintendi at No. 5) while the White Sox* have Yoan Moncada and Lucas Giolito at No. 1 and No. 3, the Braves have Dansby Swanson and Ozzie Albies at No. 4 and No. 12, and the Pirates have Tyler Glasnow and Austin Meadows at No. 8 and No. 9. Even the Yankees have Clint Frazier at No. 15, Gleyber Torres at No. 17 and Jorge Matero at No. 18:

 

http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=prospects

 

* the White Sox also have Michael Kopech at No. 30, Reynaldo Lopez at No. 38, Carson Fulmer at No. 58 and Zack Collins at No. 80

 

The top two is about as strong as any team in the bigs and definitely better than most.

 

Are there a few teams I'd put above them that you have showed examples of???? yes.

[moonslav59]

For what it's worth, MLB Prospect Watch ranks Rafael Devers and Jason Groome at No. 15 and No. 31 (with Andrew Benintendi at No. 5) while the White Sox* have Yoan Moncada and Lucas Giolito at No. 1 and No. 3, the Braves have Dansby Swanson and Ozzie Albies at No. 4 and No. 12, and the Pirates have Tyler Glasnow and Austin Meadows at No. 8 and No. 9. Even the Yankees have Clint Frazier at No. 15, Gleyber Torres at No. 17 and Jorge Matero at No. 18:

 

http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2016?list=prospects

 

* the White Sox also have Michael Kopech at No. 30, Reynaldo Lopez at No. 38, Carson Fulmer at No. 58 and Zack Collins at No. 80

 

I guess if we count Beni, we do stack up pretty well with anyone else's top 2 or 3. Three in the top 31 is nice.

 

I'm not sure how many other teams have such a steep drop off after top 31 players. We have Travis and then another huge gap to the next guy.

 

I'd like to see someone rank every team's 24 and under players. It's like team with great prospects that fly up the ladder and graduate early are penalized in the rankings.

 

Of course, we'd be near the top before all these trades, but we still would look good when compared to other teams' top 6 young players.

 

24 Betts

24 Bogaerts

24 ERod

22 Beni

20 Devers

18 Groome

 

Also: 24: Hernandez, Owens

23: Travis

21: Dalbec, Chatham, Ockimey

18: Raudes

[Slasher9]

When you have 4 guys fighting for 2 slots, and they all are pretty close in terms of past performances, then ST'ing can influence who gets the first shot at winning and keeping a rotation slot.

 

Pedro was never on the bubble.

 

if you have 4 guys fighting for 2 slots and everything is equal...you start the guys in AAA who have options / minimum contract $$$ / young guys you want to control innings.

[southpaw777]

I still say by the end of 2017 there will be a few more names in our system on peoples radars. Theres some potentially very good MLB talent in the system still. I expect some of them to really start finding their way this year.

[moonslav59]

if you have 4 guys fighting for 2 slots and everything is equal...you start the guys in AAA who have options / minimum contract $$$ / young guys you want to control innings.

 

As I showed before, I'm not sure ERod's innings need to be "controlled". Maybe PoM, Wright and Buch's do. They've all had trouble pitching a lot of innings.

 

If everything is equal, which to me would mean ERod would have to be doing worse in ST'ing to even him up with others, then yes, starting ERod in AAA has merit.

 

To me, our pen still needs help, so I'm looking at which starters make better RP'ers. I'd place ERod last in that area.

 

ERod is my 4th starter, unless something happens to convince me otherwise.

[Slasher9]

ok - I'll be the sucker and bite. let's say you got 3 spots already locked up right? You agree? In their cases, it doesn't make any difference what kinds of whips, bips, knockouts or whatever right? Those 3 are in for sure. So now you got Pomeranz, Wright, E-Rod, and buck snorts all battling it out for the last 2 spots in the rotation. I guess I should have been clearer- I agree with you in the event that E-rod really sucks and gets outpitched in spring training then yes I would consider sending him down. but since I happen to think that he is a better pitcher than all of them, he would have to suck a lot more the way I (and probably a few ) others see it. Good try with the Pedro comparison but sorry I would not just send a better pitcher back to the minor leagues just because you wanted to have a stronger bench. I'm trying to be nice here because obviously no one else agrees with me (sarcasm) but I think it would be a sorry assed day when then happens to someone if they have earned the right to be there.

 

sorry. then i dont understand your original point in the post i was responding to. did you or did you not want the "best" player to pitch? so you are basing it on last season's numbers? last 2 seasons numbers? career numbers? how are we differentiating Erod, Clay, Wright, Pom in CP176's world?

as for pedro, i was being facetious. i realize our top 3 are locked in regardless how they do in ST. i was just trying to comprehend how you were going to decide on our 4 & 5 starters by stating "the BEST player should pitch". again, how are we ranking those 4? by ST numbers????

[moonslav59]

I still say by the end of 2017 there will be a few more names in our system on peoples radars. Theres some potentially very good MLB talent in the system still. I expect some of them to really start finding their way this year.

 

I agree, but they may move up to Travis status not Moncada, Kopech, Espi & Margot status.

[Slasher9]

Your best players play when you don't risk losing a potentially very good player by doing that. It's not about rewarding someone who is a better player. It's about giving the team the best chance to win over the course of a long season. To do that, you need depth and flexibility.

 

We're not talking about benching Price over Owens. We're talking about two pitchers that could provide similar back end production.

 

Not a difficult concept to understand.

 

Bingo this.

[moonslav59]

sorry. then i dont understand your original point in the post i was responding to. did you or did you not want the "best" player to pitch? so you are basing it on last season's numbers? last 2 seasons numbers? career numbers? how are we differentiating Erod, Clay, Wright, Pom in CP176's world?

as for pedro, i was being facetious. i realize our top 3 are locked in regardless how they do in ST. i was just trying to comprehend how you were going to decide on our 4 & 5 starters by stating "the BEST player should pitch". again, how are we ranking those 4? by ST numbers????

 

ERod has nasty stuff. His upside is higher. He's just entering prime.

 

Wright (my number 5 right now) pitched great the first half of last year and looked good in previous years. I like having a knuckleballer in the rotation, because it messes up the opponent's timing for the next guy starting. I did an extensive study on the pitcher who followed Wake and founf their ERA was much higher than their seasonal ERA not starting behind Wake.

 

Pom & Buch in the pen helps our pen immensely. ERod in AAA does not.

 

Buch hasn't pitched well for a full season in a long time, if anyone should have his innings restricted, it should be Buch.

 

Pom has one half season of quality SP'ing under his belt. He's been a RP'er for a while.

[Slasher9]

Great article, but I still love the trade. This was the one paragraph that got me...

 

The other aspect of this that bothers me even more is this: one of the main reasons the Red Sox paid David Price over $200 million was so they wouldn’t have to make a farm system destroying deal like this. Recall last off-season when Dombrowski decided he had to have an “ace” (the irony being the eventual 2016 Cy Young award winner was already on his staff) but determined the pitchers on the trade market (including Sale) were too expensive in terms of prospects. So instead he issued the largest contract ever given to a starting pitcher. And now, one year later, now with “Cy” Porcello and Pomeranz, he blows up the farm system anyway. Does this seem like the workings of someone with a plan, or the meanderings of a ten-year-old in a mall whose parents just gave him a $20 bill and told him to “have fun?”

 

why is this even a story. DD blows up farms. it's what he does. walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...did we expect a german short hair pointer? why is this surprising to the author of this article? just be thankful we got sale for that haul. sure beats having RP Pom for Espi.

[Slasher9]

ERod has nasty stuff. His upside is higher. He's just entering prime.

 

Wright (my number 5 right now) pitched great the first half of last year and looked good in previous years. I like having a knuckleballer in the rotation, because it messes up the opponent's timing for the next guy starting. I did an extensive study on the pitcher who followed Wake and founf their ERA was much higher than their seasonal ERA not starting behind Wake.

 

Pom & Buch in the pen helps our pen immensely. ERod in AAA does not.

 

Buch hasn't pitched well for a full season in a long time, if anyone should have his innings restricted, it should be Buch.

 

Pom has one half season of quality SP'ing under his belt. He's been a RP'er for a while.

 

i agree 100% on Erod and his stuff. i fully expect him to be the ACE of our staff in a year or two. that being said...it's 2017. he has options.

slasher's thoughts:

we traded my favorite minor league SP pitcher prospect in a very long time for Pom. i dont want that trade to be for a middle reliever.

clay when he is good clay is ACE. contract year + 2nd half of last season makes me think he will be good clay. why not try and ride him from the beginning of the season. we should 100% do this. if he pitches great and we are front running...keep him out there. if he is pitching great and we are fading...trade him before the deadline for prospects and salary relief (reset tax $$). if he stinks...insert wright in the rotation or bring up erod, put clay in pen.

wright - i would also like a knuckler in the rotation but based on my points above he would start the season in my pen as long releif and [pinch runner ]

[Bellhorn04]

Great article, but I still love the trade. This was the one paragraph that got me...

 

The other aspect of this that bothers me even more is this: one of the main reasons the Red Sox paid David Price over $200 million was so they wouldn’t have to make a farm system destroying deal like this. Recall last off-season when Dombrowski decided he had to have an “ace” (the irony being the eventual 2016 Cy Young award winner was already on his staff) but determined the pitchers on the trade market (including Sale) were too expensive in terms of prospects. So instead he issued the largest contract ever given to a starting pitcher. And now, one year later, now with “Cy” Porcello and Pomeranz, he blows up the farm system anyway. Does this seem like the workings of someone with a plan, or the meanderings of a ten-year-old in a mall whose parents just gave him a $20 bill and told him to “have fun?”

 

Some of these statements are pretty presumptuous. How does the writer know that last offseason the White Sox weren't insisting on Betts or Bogaerts in a deal for Sale? Does the writer not think the price on Sale may have dropped since last offseason? Most of us were surprised we didn't have to include any major league talent in the deal.

[notin]

Who are the most expendable players on our current 40 man roster?

 

Here's my order:

 

Noe Ramirez

Deven Marrero

Bryce Brentz (would be higher, but we have very little OF depth)

Brandon Workman

Roenis Elias (out of options)

Fernando Abad (out of options)

Heath Hembree (out of options)

Luis Ysla

Kyle Martin

Josh Rutledge (out of options)

 

 

Rutledge may have the inside track for the 25th roster spot, seeing as to how he was a Rule 5 pick that someone wanted back for some reason. ..

[notin]

Some of these statements are pretty presumptuous. How does the writer know that last offseason the White Sox weren't insisting on Betts or Bogaerts in a deal for Sale? Does the writer not think the price on Sale may have dropped since last offseason? Most of us were surprised we didn't have to include any major league talent in the deal.

 

It certainly is presumptuous. On the other hand, dropped or not, Sale was still extremely expensive and did require emptying the farm system for a team that already had two Cy Young winners in the rotation.

 

What the writer ignores is that after 2015, the Sox were a last place team, and the farm system was looking very important. After 2016, the Sox were a division champion, so the investing in the long term players looked a lot less necessary...

[notin]

I still say by the end of 2017 there will be a few more names in our system on peoples radars. Theres some potentially very good MLB talent in the system still. I expect some of them to really start finding their way this year.

 

Of course some will.

 

But also some prospects already on the radar will start their slow fades into oblivion. So it all evens out...

[moonslav59]

why is this even a story. DD blows up farms. it's what he does. walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...did we expect a german short hair pointer? why is this surprising to the author of this article? just be thankful we got sale for that haul. sure beats having RP Pom for Espi.

 

I am thankful.

 

The Sale trade was like a dream come true.

 

I realize it's going to affect our future, and that was the cost.